Black History Month acts as a gauge of the current political climate, so what steps can we take to refresh it?

It's Black History Month in the United Kingdom, and it seems it’s time for a re-evaluation. As time has passed, an event that began as a celebration and reminder of heritage, traditions and links between international African diaspora communities, has adopted a business-like atmosphere, expanding to include gatherings where individuals of African heritage are paid to address predominantly white listeners about implicit prejudice and “allyship”. The anti-racism rallies of the last decade generated a rise in the enterprise of displaying cultural sensitivity. Yet, that phase is now over. The tide has reached its height, leaving a sort of hollowed out legacy of what increasing understanding is for.

The History of Black History Month

Initially celebrated in the US and Canada, Black History Month was established in 1962 as “Negro History Week” by historian of African descent Carter G. Woodson with multiple days of commemoration and observance in the second week of February. Black History Month developed from this campaign and was officially launched in 1970. Currently it is marked not only in the United States and Canada in the second month, but also in the tenth month in the United Kingdom, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands.

The observance has transformed since that time, focusing less on the accounts of the slave trade across the Atlantic and civil rights battles, and increasingly on influential individuals of color in politics, culture, and activism, and extensively acknowledging the contribution Black people have made to shape the country. It is in educational institutions where Black History Month is most regularly observed, with discussions and heritage festivities. But the method the month is commemorated is a reflection of the current political situation. How it progresses is a good lesson in how assimilation leads to dismantling: the transformation of Black History Month has impeded the objective of it, which is to confront structural and organizational discrimination.

A Disconcerting Period

Hardly anything shows how critical it is to reevaluate Black History Month as much as the specific period in which it occurs this year. In the UK, a revitalized conservative movement in the shape of the Reform political group is top in opinion ratings. In the recent season we observed the most significant ultra-conservative gathering in British history. Kemi Badenoch, the African descendant in charge of the right-wing political group, is a firm opponent of Black Lives Matter, and we are in a situation where a elected representative gains confidence to state that the absence of Caucasian individuals in specific city neighborhoods is a reason for concern. Meanwhile, extreme conservative groups are surging in the European continent as a complete entity.

In the America, a massive attack against inclusion programs and preferential policies has been taken, often successfully, to the top legal institutions of the nation. A effort to remove Black history and narrative from the records is ongoing. One of the former president's early administrative commands focused on the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and the renowned cultural organization, alleging that they of a “concerted and widespread effort to alter the country's historical narrative” by depicting the United States “as naturally discriminatory”.

Given these circumstances, the celebration symbolises how minimally it can be impactful if it is limited to either routine organizational acknowledgments, or politically neutered commemorations of former accomplishments, rather than challenging the realities of the current era. It also reveals how its short period means that it is detached from the more extensive continuous action that is required. An academic expert, a professor at a learning establishment, articulated it most accurately when she expressed apprehension about the fleeting superficial actions of the month. “The issue with taking a tokenistic approach”, she commented, “is that it frequently results in that Black History Month turns into a fleeting performance rather than a catalyst for change.”

Reevaluating, Not Abandoning

Figuring out how to adapt, revise and extend efforts for equal rights and acknowledgment in such periods of dismay and anxiety is a treacherous thing. There is a urge to just do away with things like Black History Month completely, thinking they are no longer suitable, or are remnants of an time that has failed to deliver.

However, regardless of the situation, Black History Month, and in fact the whole broad system and heritage of campaigns for equality – grassroots Black Lives Matter organisations, inclusion and equity efforts, and indeed, including corporate presentations – constitute an framework that a significant effort has gone into. It is there not merely to decline as the politics moves on (and in fact, deteriorates), but to be a dynamic entity.

So what would a fresh vibrant Black History Month appear as? Well, first, it would be extended beyond a brief observance: something that is distributed through the year (as various establishments are already beginning to do), sections of its curriculum (particularly around historic Black characters) integrated into academic syllabi. It would also be a era that does not avoid political issues, and allows opportunity for individuals, particularly young people, to share their anxieties and narratives. What value has basic knowledge of the past when it ignores the present reality of extreme conservative demonstrations in the urban areas? Establishments who observe it should not be comforted with the passive language of “unconscious bias” and alertness to minor insults, but challenged by the risks that affect everyone if anti-racism is not taken seriously. In short, Black History Month should be made up-to-date, urgent, and reactive. Perhaps an complete renaming is necessary – Present-Day African Heritage Celebration.